The Concept of God and the Problem of Evil (Part 3)

Introduction

In the last post I argued that there is not just one problem of evil; rather there are a variety of problems of evil. In the next two posts I’m going to consider the biblical view of evil and some ways that Christian theists have responded to God’s reason or justification for allowing evil in the world. Such reasons are called theodicies. [1] This post will focus on the biblical view of evil and its origin. 

Biblical View of Evil

As noted in part one of this series, evil comes in two distinct forms: moral evil and natural evil. As discussed, moral evil has to do with evil caused by an agent; whereas, natural evils are the kinds of evils that occur apart from the actions of an agent, such as tragedies brought about by tsunamis or mudslides. Typically, Christian orthodoxy has linked natural evil to moral evil based on the fall of humanity in Genesis 3.  

In Genesis 1 we read that all that God created was “good,” and then, on day six, it was “very good.” Yet, only a few chapters later, we see that humans have rebelled against God, bringing about several curses. For the woman, she will have increased pain in child bearing and that she will be ruled by her husband (Gen 3:16). For the man, the ground is now cursed, and he will have to eat from it “through painful toil” (3:17, NIV). No longer will humans have access to the food from the garden, but the ground will “produce thorns and thistles” and he will have to “eat the plants of the field” (3:18, NIV). Some have taken the cursing of the ground to indicate that before the fall of humanity, there were no natural occurrences that cause death (human or animal), such as earthquakes, tsunamis, or mudslides, nor were there things like disease. These are all a result of the fall. Those taking this view often couple it with Romans 8:20-21, which says, “creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it,” and that one day “the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God” (NIV). Natural evils are directly connected to the fall. 

We also see in the Genesis 3 passage that human death entered the picture. In 3:19-20 God tells the man, “By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return” (NIV). This verse, along with Gen 2:16-17 and God’s words in 3:22 that the first man “must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever,” indicate that before the fall the possibility of immortality was available to humans. What about animal death? Did animals die before the fall? Some have extrapolated from Genesis 3:17-18, which speaks of the curse on the ground, Romans 8:20-21, which suggests that creation is in “bondage to decay,” and Romans 5:12, which indicates that all death entered the world through sin, that animals did not die before the fall. They also argue that before the fall there was no predation. All animals were herbivores (Gen 1:29-30).   

Not everyone, however, takes the above view—which, for our purposes, I’ll call the combined package the Cosmic Fall view (CFV)—particularly with respect to animal death and the occurrence of natural disasters. Most Evangelical Christians recognize that human death is a direct result of the fall, but not all agree that animal death is. Further some reject the direct connection between natural disasters and sin. Let’s begin with natural disasters and sin, followed by animal death. 

Dissenters from CFV find it difficult, exegetically, to extrapolate things like hurricanes and other natural occurrences which cause natural evil from texts that speak of the ground’s having been cursed, especially since we are told what the ground’s being cursed looks like, “painful toil” in human labor and the ground’s production of “thorns and thistles” in man’s attempt to have food. 

But what of the passage from Romans 8 that speaks of creation as being “subjected to frustration” and needing liberation from its “bondage to decay”? There are, however, some ambiguities in this passage. First, the text says that “creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it” (8:20, NIV). We are never told “who” it is that subjects creation to this frustration. It seems, however, that the likely candidate is God, since, in the next part of the passage we are given the “why” it was subjected to frustration, “in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.” God is the only one who could liberate and bring freedom to creation. Such a feat is impossible for anyone else. 

Second, Paul seems to be making a distinction between creation’s being “subjected to frustration” and its need for liberation from “its bondage to decay.” In other words, the reason that creation was “subjected to frustration” was for creation’s liberation and freedom from “its bondage to decay.” Perhaps one might link creation’s being “subjected to frustration” with God’s cursing the ground or to the fall itself (however, this is far from obvious, from the text, at least), since it seems that the subjecting of creation to frustration happened at some past time; however, it is less clear with decay? When did the “bondage to decay” begin? Was it when Adam and Eve sinned (before God cursed the ground) or was it at the beginning of creation? If Paul is distinguishing between “frustration” and “bondage to decay,” then clearly the frustration took place after the “bondage to decay” was set in motion. Perhaps N.T. Wright states it most clearly for the dissenters of CFV when he says of Romans 8:21, “It is a picture in which the corruption and futility of creation itself, created good but doomed to decay, is seen as a kind of slavery, so that, creation, too, needs to experience its exodus, its liberation.” [2] In another place, Wright stresses, “When we read Romans 8, we find Paul affirming the whole of creation is groaning in travail as it longs for its redemption. Creation is good, but it is not God. it is beautiful, but its beauty is at present transient.” [3] Wright’s point is that creation, as magnificent as it is, has been subject to decay from its beginning. That’s part of the transience and vicissitudes of a creation that is “not God.” In other words, creation in its very nature is finite. As finite, the creation breaks down and is in the process of decay. But where does human sin come in? The effects of human sin exacerbate the already-decaying creation order. It is through human agency (or because of human sin) that God has subjected creation to frustration. Working from Genesis 9:1-2, Alan Hayward makes the following point with respect to creation’s groaning:

            This grim prophecy in Genesis 9 has been amply fulfilled. The presence of our race has proved to be an ecological disaster for Planet Earth. Scattered over the world there are many man-made deserts, where once there was fruitful soil teeming with life. Thousands of species have been made extinct as a direct consequence of man’s selfish exploitation of Nature, and thousands more are threatened. Ecologists warn us that if go on like this for another century we shall ruin the earth completely.

                        No Wonder, then, that ‘the whole creation has been groaning’ under the ‘futility’ of man’s behavior, as Paul put it. [4]

Non-adherents of CFV have other reasons for rejecting the belief that decay is a result of the fall. For example, many have suggested that, based on the geological records, plant and animal death was abundant long before humans entered the scene (they give other reasons, such as, the second law of thermodynamics, etc.). But doesn’t this contradict Romans 5:12, which suggests that all death entered through Adam? “Not so fast,” says the dissenter of CFV. Suggesting that all death came through sin is based on a dubious reading of Romans 5:12. The passage reads as follows: “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned” (NIV). On this point, I’ll quote Hebrew and biblical scholar, Michael Heiser:

            The text says absolutely nothing about animals—zero. Whatever happened at the Fall resulted in a transition from (apparent) immortality to mortality for humankind. Animal life has to be read into the text for the purpose of promoting a specific view of the fossil record. Nothing is said of any other life than human kind, so we should not infer anything about it. The verse cannot be used to justify the idea that animal life (and of course plant life) could not and did not die before the Fall. To argue anything in the that regard from this verse is to insert it into the verse. [5] 

But what of Genesis 1:29-30, which indicates that there was no predation and that both humans and animals were vegetarians. Tim Chaffey (a personal friend of mine) and Jason Lyle ask, “Why would God command a vegetarian diet for all living creatures?” [6] The answer is obvious suggest Chaffey and Lisle, it is “because death was not a part of the original creation.” [7] The dissenter will retort back that obviously plant death occurred (which indicates decay, at least in the modern sense) before sin entered the world. But further, while God “gives” (not commands, pace Chaffey and Lyle) vegetables and plant life to animals and humans to eat, the text does not require a reading that suggests that vegetables were all that animals ate, nor does it state, anywhere in Scripture, that animals transitioned from herbivores to carnivores. Another argument given is that Adam must have known what death was, since God told Adam that he would surely die in the day that he eats from the tree (Gen 2:17). A final argument non-adherents of CFV give is that the Bible seems to suggest that predation was ordained by God. Take for example Psalm 104:21, “The lions roar for their prey and seek their food from God” (NIV) or God’s words to Job, 

            Do you hunt the prey for the lioness and satisfy the hunger of the lions when they crouch in their dens or lie in what in a thicket? Who provides food for the raven when its young cry out to God and wander about for lack of food?” (Job 38:39-41, NIV) 

            Does the hawk take flight by your wisdom and spread his wings toward the south? Does the eagle soar at your command and build his nest on high? He dwells on a cliff and stays there at night; a rocky crag is his stronghold. From there he seeks out his food; his eyes detect it from afar. His young ones feast on blood, and where the slain are, there is he. (Job 39:27-28, NIV)

What the hawk does is by God’s wisdom and the eagle by His command. Creation order, then, works together so as God ordained it.  

Dissenters of CFV question the CFV view of creation. Often, those holding to CFV understand the original creation as perfection; however, non-adherents to CFV will argue that Scripture only says that creation is (very) good. Even after the fall, God never changed his declaration that creation is good. Interestingly enough, Paul recognizes this and affirms the above point on the goodness of creation in a passage pertaining to the eating of certain kinds of food: “For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer” (1 Tim 4:4-5, NIV).

Concluding Thoughts

It seems that the above discussion only scratches the surface pertaining to the Bible’s teaching on evil and its origin. As noted throughout, there are (at least) two views with respect to the ramifications and extent of the fall on creation order. Throughout I labeled the one group CFV and the other dissenters of the CFV. Perhaps, the latter label is not fair. Many of these folk would affirm that the fall of humanity affects every aspect of creation to some extent or another. So, maybe it would be more befitting to call this group the Limited Cosmic Fall View (LCFV). They would affirm that human death occurred as a result of the fall. Yet, physical occurrences that might lead to natural evils, e.g., tsunamis and earthquakes, and animal death were originally a part of the natural created order and not a result of the fall.

As shown throughout the discussion, there are many issues involved, and I barely even scratched the surface with respect to moral evil. Nor did I consider what the Bible has to say about providence and evil. These are much more than can be discussed in a single post. Nevertheless, note the following issues that need further attention and consideration when discussing the biblical view and origin of evil:

1) If God created the world good, does “goodness” imply that there was no such thing as animal death before the fall? What do we mean by “good”? Is animal death and predation an evil? If so, how can it properly be said that creation is good? Further, if natural evils such as animal death (if animal death is an evil) did occur before the fall, then would God not be held responsible (a serious objection the LCFV view will need to consider). Should good be taken to imply “perfection of creation” or does it mean that things are in some sense in “right order, the way in which God designed them?”

2) To what extent did the introduction of human sin affect the created order? Did human death bring about such things as earthquakes, tsunamis, animal death, disease, and other natural evils? 

3) Another issue that will need consideration, but was not discussed here, is how one ought to interpret creation. Is creation recent or old? This debate has been going on for a long time (pun intended). There are many interpretations of Genesis 1. How one interprets Genesis 1-3 has certain ramifications for other issues pertaining to the problem of evil. A similar issue is whether evolution is a viable option for Christians. Some evangelicals are moving that direction, but does the biblical text allow for such an interpretation? [8]

4) What connection is there between moral evils and natural evils? Are all occurrences of evils a result of human sin (e.g., the death of a deer caught in a forest fire that was caused by a lightning strike)?

5) Another issue that needs consideration is whether all pain is evil. Take for example, God told Eve, “I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing” (NIV). This seems to indicate that pain was a part of the pre-fall creation, and that the pain experienced through child birth would be increased. How can we think more analytically and cautiously about pain?

Conclusion:

As noted in the introduction, the next blog post will take into consideration various theodicies that Christian theists have given to offer a justification as to why a good God allows pain, suffering, and evil in the world.  

Notes 

[1] Anthony C. Thiselton. “theodicy,” in A Concise Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Religion (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 306.

[2] N. T. Wright. The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003), 258. 

[3] N. T. Wright, Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church (New York: HaperOne, 2008), 224.

[4] Alan Hayward, Creation and Evolution: Rethinking the Evidence from Science and the Bible (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House, 1985), 183.

[5] Michael Heiser, “Romans 5:12: What it Says and What it Doesn’t Say (Part 1), April 6, 2009 <http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/04/romans-512-%E2%80%93-what-it-says-and-what-it-doesn%E2%80%99t-say-part-1/> [Accessed December 15, 2012]

[6] Tim Chaffey and Jason Lisle, Old-Earth Creationism on Trial: The Verdict is In (Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2008), 28. 

[7] Ibid.

[8] For a good introduction to this issue, I would highly recommend a book by J. P. Moreland and John Mark Reynolds, Three Views on Creation and Evolution (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999). This text covers each of the three major views: 1) Young Earth Creationism; 2) Old Earth (Progressive) Creationism; and 3) Theistic Evolution. But note that there are a variety of ways of interpreting Genesis 1: Pre-creation judgment theory; Gap Theory; Divine Revelation theory; and Divine Framework Hypothesis, just to name a few.

The Concept of God and the Problem of Evil [Part 2]

Introduction

During my last post on the concept of God and the problem of evil, I took up the task of defining evil. By way of review, I concluded that the following elements should be involved in defining evil:

1. Evil is part of reality, not merely an illusion
2. Evil is not a created thing, nor is it an individual substance, person, or force. 
3.  Evil cannot exist apart from the good (however, the reverse is not true, since we know of a good that must exist, by necessity, in every possible world—God, who is a necessary being and the supreme good); rather, it is parasitic on the good.
4. Since God created all things good and is neither the creator of nor cause of evil, we may speak of evil, then, to some extent, as the absence of the good. (Perhaps we might think of evil as in some way depriving the good.)

In this post I want to continue our discussion by looking, briefly, at just what the problem of evil is. 

The Problem(s) of Evil

In John S. Feinberg’s classic book, The Many Faces of Evil, he states as his first thesis “that there is no such thing as the problem of evil.” [1] Rather, there are various problems of evil. Following Feinberg, I’ll distinguish between three distinct kinds of problems. My purpose, here, is informative and introductory, rather than to provide an answer for each. 

First, one might make a distinction between the philosophical/theological problem of evil and the religious or existential problem of evil. The philosophical/theological problem of evil has to do with how we are to understand the existence of evil altogether. It seeks to answer questions pertaining to the origins and nature of evil. What is evil? Where did evil come from? If God exists, why would He allow evil? Is evil a real part of the world, or is it merely an illusion? The philosophical/theological problem also wrestles with the distinction between moral evils and natural evils. As noted on the previous post, moral evils have to do with certain evils caused by an agent (e.g., humans or angels); whereas natural evils are the kinds of evils brought about through natural events, such as earthquakes, tsunamis, or mudslides. In addition to the kinds of evil, the philosophical/theological problem wrestles with the amount, intensity and apparent gratuitousness of evil. If God exists, then why does he allow the amount and intensity of evil that we see in the world? Does God have a justifying reason for doing so? Some evils, it seems, are rather pointless (gratuitous). Why are such evils necessary? There is also the problem of animal pain and the problem of Hell. All of these areas are considered to fall under the philosophical/theological problem of evil. [2] 

But what of the religious/existential problem of evil? Unlike the philosophical/theological problem, the religious/existential problem has to do more with one’s personal struggle with evil. Such a problem brings about a crisis of faith in the individual (or community); whereby, the person suffering from the evil tries to reconcile what’s happening with God’s goodness. She might ask questions such as, “Why is this happening to me?” “What did I do to deserve this?” “If God loves me, how could He allow this to happen to me?” [3]

The second kind or type of problem has to do with one’s concept of God and evil. One’s overall worldview plays a key part in, not only how one understands evil, but also in how one understands God’s relationship to the world and response to the evil in it. There are various theological systems in the world. People have differing conceptions of God’s goodness, power, knowledge, and other perfections. Pantheists will view the problem of god and evil differently than, say, a panentheist, deist, or theist might. Even among those within a certain worldview, such as Christian theism, there are different conceptions of God. Some Christian theists believe that God determines all things, while others recognize that humans have a great deal of freedom and responsibility in what happens in the world. In one sense, these two concepts of the Christian God’s relation to the world are radically different. Such a difference affects how one might answer the problem of evil. 

Third, and lastly, with respect to the philosophical/theological problem, there is the distinction between the logical problem from evil and the evidential problem from evil. The logical form of the problem [4] suggests that there is an apparent contradiction between the following set of propositions:

            [A] God is omnipotent

            [B] God is all-loving

            [C] Evil exists in the world

As David Hume put the objection, “Is he willing to prevent evil, but not able? then is he impotent. Is he able, but not willing? then is he malevolent. Is he both able and willing? whence then is evil? [5]

The evidential problem [6] differs from the logical problem in that it is inductive in nature, relying heavily on probability. According to those promoting a form of the evidential problem from evil, while there may be no logical contradiction between the existence of God and evil in the world, evil, nevertheless, counts against God’s existence. [7]

Conclusion

In this post, I have not sought to answer any of the various problems of evil; rather, I have only provided a basic introduction to the issue. As the series progresses, I aim to go deeper with respect to some of the various problems discussed above. 

Notes

[1] John S. Feinberg, The Many Faces of Evil: Theological Systems and the Problems of Evil, revised and expanded edition (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2004), 21.

[2] Ibid., 21-22.  

[3] Ibid., 21.

[4] Most atheists and theists agree that the logical problem from evil no longer poses a threat to Christian theists. This has to do in large part to the work of philosopher Alvin Plantinga’s Free Will Defense. See Alvin Plantinga, God, Freedom, and Evil (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1977).

[5] David Hume, Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, second edition, edited by Richard H. Popkin (Hackett Publishing Co., 1998), X (p. 63). 

[6] For two varieties of evidential arguments, see “The Problem of Evil and Some Varieties of Atheism,” by William L. Rowe, and “Pain and Pleasure: An Evidential Problem for Theists,” by Paul Drapper, both found in The Evidential Argument from Evil, edited by Daniel Howard-Snyder (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1996): 1-11 and 12-29. 

[7] Feinberg, 24.

Hope Against All Hope: A God Who Brings Life From the Dead

I’m currently in a series on the problem of evil, but in light of our recent circumstances regarding the presidential election in the U.S., I felt compelled to write about something I hear a lot about that’s promised, but see little of—hope.

There are various ideas as to what might bring ultimate hope in life. For some of us, it’s the practical thing, like receiving a new job, getting a raise, or finding the perfect person to marry. In regards to our nation, we often find hope in one candidate, a political system of thought, or in the nation itself.

As I reflect on hope from a Christian perspective, I cannot help but think, day to day, that my hope rests not in a human or politician, a political system, a country, or humanity as a whole. Nor does my hope rest in the passing or not of some policy or law. As important as all of those might be, they provide no ultimate hope. They are temporal.

Hope for the Christian is the same kind of hope that Abraham had—hope in what seemed to be the impossible. God promised to make him into a great nation, but his wife, Sarah, was barren. She couldn’t have children. Yet, as Paul describes Abraham’s hope in Romans, it was

            Against all hope, Abraham in hope believed and so became the father of many nations, just as it had been said to him, “So shall your offspring be.” Without weakening in his faith, he faced the fact that his body was as good as dead—since he was about a hundred years old—and that Sarah’s womb was also dead. Yet he did not waiver through unbelief regarding the promise of God, but was strengthened in his faith and gave glory to God, being fully persuaded that God had power to do what he had promised. (Rom 4:18-21)  

Abraham’s hope was not found in his own abilities, nor in that of his wife’s, but in a God who could do, what seemed to be, the impossible—make something dead once again alive.

Christians, like Abraham, are to put their hope in the guarantor of their salvation—a God who has the power to do what He promises. The same God who did the impossible in the life of Abraham is the same God who promises the impossible to us—to make the dead alive again. Humanity’s ultimate hope is in the resurrection of the Son of God, who is the foreshadowing of our own resurrection and the restoration of all things. “If Christ has not been raised,” says Paul, “our preaching is useless,” and so is our faith. Our faith is “futile,” if Christ is not raised, and we are still in our sins (1 Cor 15:14, 17, NIV). As Paul continues to argue throughout the passage, our own resurrection rests squarely in Jesus’ resurrection.

Not only will we be raised, but God has plans of restoring all things, as noted in Romans 8:20-21, “For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, I hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into glorious freedom of the children of God” (NIV). The liberation of creation is intricately connected to our own liberation. As Paul writes in Colossians, through the death of Christ’s physical body, God has brought us from alienation and enemies to being reconciled to Him. Not only that, God is at work reconciling all things to Himself, whether things on earth or in heaven (Col 1:19-23, NIV).   

In the resurrection of Jesus, God inaugurates His plan of making the dead alive again. God began to reverse the effects of sin and corruption. That’s why Paul can proclaim, “Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting!” (1 Cor 15:55, NIV) As I’ve heard apologist Gary Habermas say on numerous occasions, Paul’s not simply reciting poetry, here. He’s taunting death. He knows that death has no lasting permanence on those who are in Christ. However, moving from death to life is not merely something that is future. God has also given us His Spirit who works in us, changing us and making us alive—the kind of life the Bible describes as eternal life—and the kind of life that comes from having a relationship with the God of the universe (Jn 17:3). This is God’s own life at work in us. This power from the Spirit that is available “for us who believe,” Paul describes as, “like the working of the mighty strength, which he exerted in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms” (Eph 1:19-20, NIV). God has set us free, not only by forgiving our guilt, but also in giving us the power to overcome sin in our lives through the Spirit. If we are in Christ, we are united with Him in His death. We have died to ourselves, so that, we may live a new life now (Rom 6:4, NIV), which will ultimately result in our being united in Christ through the resurrection of our bodies. As Paul proclaims, “For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin—because anyone who has died has been freed from sin” (Rom 6:7, NIV). As believers, we have been freed from the power of sin in our lives in the present. God has given us His Spirit, who offers new life to us, and the power to overcome sin. He is continually at work in us, making us new.

Yet, this new life is not to be used for our own selfish pleasures. It’s not just about our own personal gain. God has given us new life, through the power of the Holy Spirit, to make a difference in the here and now. We have been called to love our neighbors as ourselves (Mk 12:31). We have been called to give of ourselves to the other—our friends in pain, those who have felt the effects of evil in this world, the widow, and the orphan (Js 1:27). We have been called to love our enemies and to live in peace with others, so far as it is up to us (Matt:5:44; Rom 12:14, 16, 18). We have been called to forgive unconditionally those who have wronged us and to reconcile with them (Matt 5:44; 18:15, 21-22). We have been called to turn the other cheek and not seek revenge (Matt 5:39; Rom 12:19). We have been called to give, not only our tunic, but our robe as well (Matt 5:40). We have been called to stop the gossip and malign talk (Js 3:2-9). We have been called to stop living in hatred toward our fellow humans, who are, just as much as we were, in need of life, and who have been made in the image and likeness of God, and to love them (Rom 12:14, 17-18, 20; 13:8-10; 1 Jn 3:13-16). We have been called to help the poor and those in need, including our enemies (Ps 82; Mk 12:31; Lk 10:25-37; Rom 1:13, 20; Js 1:27; 2:14-17; 1 Jn 3:16-18). We have been called to submit to those who govern us and to pray for them, because God “wants all men,” including kings and governing authorities, “to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (Rom 13:1-5; 1 Tim 2:1-4). The life that we have been called to know is representative of life that will overcome and permeate all of creation in the coming of the Son of God, when He sets up His reign and rule. When we live by this eternal, kingdom life, in the here and now, we love God with all that we are.

Because of the resurrection of Jesus, God will bring about His Kingdom—a kingdom which begins now, but will culminate in the ultimate triumph of God over that all that oppose His rule—sin, corruption, and death.  Because of the resurrection of the Son of God, we have hope for the resurrection of our flesh and in the renewal of all things. This is a time when justice rules, a time when the lion will lie down with the lamb, a time when God will eliminate all evil, pain, and suffering, a time when we will be God’s people and God will be our God, a time when the presence of God will be felt through the entirety of creation, a time when we will feast on the goodness of our God and bask in the goodness of His universal triumph, and a time when we experience universal peace—as the ancient Jews understood, God will bring about shalom.

            Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death, or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away. He who was seated on the throne said, “I am making everything new!” . . . “It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life. He who overcomes will inherit all this, and I will be his God and he will be my son.”  (Rev 21:1-7, NIV)

The promise that God makes to His human creatures is that He will make the dead alive again. He will make all things new. As He raised Jesus from the dead, He promises that He will do the same for us. Yet, He also promises new life for us now. He doesn’t promise an easy road. It doesn’t mean that life now is going to be easy. There may be disappointments, persecution, and ridicule (1 Tim 3:12-13). After all, as noted earlier, to break the effects of sin in our lives, it requires death—death of our own way of doing things. It requires death to finding hope in things that are temporal. But those who are united in Christ through His death and resurrection will be given life—life that is abundant. It’s the kind of life that can only be found through a personal relationship with God. It’s the kind of life that is transformational—a life that will culminate in our ultimate transformation. It is because of the resurrection that this new life is possible. That’s why the resurrection of Jesus is the heart and center of the Gospel, the good news for all who believe.     

Jesus calls us. He makes us an offer. Hear His call: “The Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let him who hears say, “Come!” Whoever is thirsty, let him come; and whoever wishes, let him take the free gift of the water of life.” (Rev 22:17, NIV)

Shalom!